CliffordAdams is a hero to me for helping us with this project, and for his excellent software.
–Jimmy Wales to User:Clifford Adams who has 3 edits total
If I see [a contributor] is publishing shit, maybe by swearing or not making sense, I warn him ...the second time he turns on, I block him.
–Jimmy Wales , May 2006[1]
It's a bigger deal than it used to be. That has some good points and some bad points.
–Jimmy Wales [2]
You keep asking how they help build an encyclopedia. But you also link to WP:EA. I think that is your answer, no? Anything that builds a spirit of friendliness and co-operation and helps people get to know each other as human beings seems to me a good thing. Unlike divisive userboxes, the autograph books seem to just be about saying hello and being friendly.
–Jimmy Wales [3]
Given that we can't see into your home as to who is as the computer at a given moment, either this account still may be compromised or you did vandalize and are lying. Therefore, I cannot unblock this account.
— MBisanz, to a sockpuppet
MeatBall:DefendEachOther: An administrator is expected to refrain from issuing blocks in response to personal attacks directed at themselves.
— ArbCom, from the Tango RFAR
I believe in the philosophy that being a sysop is "no big deal", and requests should only be denied if the community fears that a user will abuse the few powers given to sysops.
— Cprompt, from his RfB
The making of express or implied threats against another editor is a form of harassment and is prohibited. In particular, any suggestion of seeking to disrupt or harm an editor's off-Wikipedia life (including his or her employment) in retaliation for his or her editing on Wikipedia is unacceptable.
— ArbCom, from the Jim62sch RFAR
In deciding what sanction, if any, to impose against a user who has violated site policies, the Arbitration Committee may consider all surrounding mitigating or other circumstances.
— ArbCom, from the Jim62sch RFAR
Administrators are authorized to use any and all means at their disposal to ensure that every Wikipedia article is in full compliance with the letter and spirit of the biographies of living persons policy.
— ArbCom, from the Footnoted quotes RFAR
Reasonable efforts to discourage children from disclosing identifying personal information are appropriate.
— ArbCom, from the Protecting children's privacy RFAR
Please direct all communication regarding blocking of pedophilia advocates directly to the Arbitration Committee at arbcom-l at lists.wikimedia.org Fred Bauder 12:06, 24 April 2007 (UTC) for the Arbitration Committee.
— ArbCom
Links to attack sites may be removed by any user; such removals are exempt from 3RR. Deliberately linking to an attack site may be grounds for blocking.
— ArbCom, from the MONGO RFAR
In cases where all reasonable attempts to control disruption have failed, the Committee may be forced to adopt seemingly Draconian measures as a last resort for preventing further damage to the project.
— ArbCom, from the Durova RFAR
Users, especially administrators, who are associated, or suspected of association, with sites which are hypercritical of Wikipedia can expect their Wikipedia activities as well as their activities on the hypercritical website, to be closely monitored.
— ArbCom, from the MONGO RFAR
A website that engages in the practice of publishing private information concerning the identities of Wikipedia participants will be regarded as an attack site whose pages should not be linked to from Wikipedia pages under any circumstances.
— ArbCom, from the MONGO RFAR
There are hundreds of administrators available to monitor problem users.
— ArbCom, from the Coolcat, Davenbelle and Stereotek RFAR
No, it's prevention. We don't trust you. It's entirely personal.